Governor Suggests the Gun Industry Wants to Sell Guns to Criminals and the Mentally Deranged

[Karee 4,191]

The reason I ask these questions is that while Newtown was a tragedy, are any of these laws going to have an effect on preventing it happening in the future? From what I have seen so far, the answer appears to be no. It looks like a bunch of politicians falling all over themselves to get on TV saying they are doing something, when in reality, nothing will change.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The reason I ask these questions is that while Newtown was a tragedy, are any of these laws going to have an effect on preventing it happening in the future? From what I have seen so far, the answer appears to be no. It looks like a bunch of politicians falling all over themselves to get on TV saying they are doing something, when in reality, nothing will change.

Did you see Asa Hutchinson yesterday? He wants to arm all the schools, so the NRA can wash its hands of the whole issue.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/nra-armed-guards-schools/2013/04/02/id/497513

However, he has no problem expanding background checks, much to the chagrin of his NRA masters.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/07/nras-hutchinson-bucks-lapierre-background-checks-at-gun-shows-would-seem-appropriate/

[decocker 7,198]

The reason I ask these questions is that while Newtown was a tragedy, are any of these laws going to have an effect on preventing it happening in the future? From what I have seen so far, the answer appears to be no. It looks like a bunch of politicians falling all over themselves to get on TV saying they are doing something, when in reality, nothing will change.

from the beginning i had hoped newtown would draw attention to mental illness. we could be doing so much more in that area. instead, like always, nothing but guns.

gun control, especially gun control alone, will not keep events like these from happening.

[Karee 4,191]

from the beginning i had hoped newtown would draw attention to mental illness. we could be doing so much more in that area. instead, like always, nothing but guns.

gun control, especially gun control alone, will not keep events like these from happening.

Agree 100%

I think that it's easier to blame the weapons used. Kinda the same thing with drugs. It's the drugs damnit!. It's the weapons damnit! Because on the surface those are things that can be blamed easily. Solving mental health/drug addiction issues can't be resolved easily, quickly, or inexpensively.

The mental midgets in congress and other places run around screaming "it's the guns! it's the guns!" while never asking what caused this dude to get so brain-f*cked in the first place, to make him want to blow away all these kids?

[decocker 7,198]

Agree 100%

I think that it's easier to blame the weapons used. Kinda the same thing with drugs. It's the drugs damnit!. It's the weapons damnit! Because on the surface those are things that can be blamed easily. Solving mental health/drug addiction issues can't be resolved easily, quickly, or inexpensively.

yep.

if people were to get paranoid about controls within the pharmaceutical industry, big pharma would loose profits. no question.on the other hand, when people get paranoid about losing their guns or being unarmed in the face of a mass shooting, gun sales do not suffer in the slightest..

Edited April 8, 2013 by val erie

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

yep.

if people were to get paranoid about controls within the pharmaceutical industry, big pharma would loose profits. no question.on the other hand, when people get paranoid about losing their guns or being unarmed in the face of a mass shooting, gun sales do not suffer in the slightest..

The difference is the gatekeepers. For drugs, it is the doctors and the pharmacists. If you try to go around them, you go to jail. You try and sell legally obtained drugs to somebody else, you go to jail. These days, try and get opiates like Vicodin from your doctor, and the same doctors that were handing them out like candy ten years ago might prescribe a few only, if you can really convince them of your need. There is a national registry of who is prescribing what kinds of narcotics, how much, and to whom.

Guns also supposedly have gatekeepers, only nobody knows what is going through the front gate, and worse, what is leaving by the back gate that seems to be left wide open.

Edited April 8, 2013 by The Patriot

[decocker 7,198]

The difference is the gatekeepers. For drugs, it is the doctors and the pharmacists. If you try to go around them, you go to jail. You try and sell legally obtained drugs to somebody else, you go to jail. These days, try and get opiates like Vicodin from your doctor, and the same doctors that were handing them out like candy ten years ago might prescribe a few only, if you can really convince them of your need. There is a national registry of who is prescribing what kinds of narcotics, how much, and to whom.

Guns also supposedly have gatekeepers, only nobody know what is going through the front gate, and worse, what is leaving by the back gate that seems to be left wide open.

the similarity lies in the lobbyists. of course we should have gatekeepers for both arenas. but when there is money to be made, concessions are soon to follow. doctors and pharmacists may be writing scripts, but private companies are supplying the drugs, for profit - not charity. the same way gun owners may feel like the nra is protecting their rights and security, parents and patients feel companies like lilly and pfizer are ultimately protecting health and well being..

[Darnell 8,479]

Conn. gov faults gun lobbyists over restrictions

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy harshly criticized gun industry lobbyists on Sunday, saying they are doing too little to halt gun violence.

Uh, pardon, what's Mr. Malloy doing to institute state level background checks since he's been in office? He failed, earlier, aye?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The reason I ask these questions is that while Newtown was a tragedy, are any of these laws going to have an effect on preventing it happening in the future? From what I have seen so far, the answer appears to be no. It looks like a bunch of politicians falling all over themselves to get on TV saying they are doing something, when in reality, nothing will change.

I read somewhere the Newtown guy violated 40+ laws. What's a few more right. I think one or two more might have stopped him

[himher 634]

do you normally hold lobbyists in such high esteem?

Lobbyists that periodically remind Washington on my (and your) behalf that individuals have the right to defend themselves and own / keep firearms to do it?

Yes, I do.

Now and lemme think - which lobbyists do you hold in high esteem? I am recalling. You hold the lobbyists that lobby for nice prison conditions and criminals rights and programs for criminals in high esteem.

Which one absolutely guarantees that a nut or criminal will not go off on other people:

1. No access to guns

2. No access to other people

Edited April 9, 2013 by himher

[himher 634]

I read somewhere the Newtown guy violated 40+ laws. What's a few more right. I think one or two more might have stopped him

Doubtless. If we could just find that one missing law that would halt a nut from using a stolen gun to kill people or absent the gun use something else to kill people.

[decocker 7,198]

Lobbyists that periodically remind Washington on my (and your) behalf that individuals have the right to defend themselves and own / keep firearms to do it?

Yes, I do.

Now and lemme think - which lobbyists do you hold in high esteem? I am recalling. You hold the lobbyists that lobby for nice prison conditions and criminals rights and programs for criminals in high esteem.

Which one absolutely guarantees that a nut or criminal will not go off on other people:

1. No access to guns

2. No access to other people

which lobbyists do i hold in high esteem? try again without putting words in my mouth. you're recalling wrong.

and all this paranoia about losing your second amendment rights while stroking the nra like they give a ####### about much other than money. they play to your fears and you gobble it up.

you can't put "nuts" in the same category as "criminals" before any criminal activity has taken place.

[Caryh 5,206]

they said that in the statement i linked....

But then they lobby against any laws that would attempt to do just that. Talk is one thing, like many organizations they talk one way yet when their feet hit the pavement, they're doing the exact opposite.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

There's also the fact that some people shouldn't have access to guns due to not having the mental capacity to exercise proper decision making skills in regards to using weapons. Not crazy, but those who put themselves in situations they normally wouldn't if they weren't armed.

[JohnR! 5,495]

But then they lobby against any laws that would attempt to do just that. Talk is one thing, like many organizations they talk one way yet when their feet hit the pavement, they're doing the exact opposite.

That should come as no surprise when one looks at David Keene's bio and the verbiage used... The only thing missing is a Nascar sponsorship and white sheets...

http://www.meetthenra.org/nra-member/David%20Keene